Dr. Astro: what object could be this, seen from Volcan Turrialba?

You sure spend a lot of time on here though...

I get some very good and fun ideas from this place.

Wouldn't doubt that.

It does look like lens flare though. Does the vid tell us what lens it was, whether it was being used with a lens hood, what camera model etc.? You have to start with the stuff we knows before the stuff we don't knows.

Case in point: the Russian meteor. The apparent missile that passed right through it and disappeared? Much use made of the negative, this black object passing right through the exploding meteor... except, step back, look at the original in positive and without magnifying, it's lens flare. You can't blame a crappy plastic dashcam lens for that.

There's plenty of weird shit going on in this world without the mistakes we all make over the explicable; re-allocate your energies.

YIP...

Arrrrgh I watched some...arrgh you bastards, I wasn't going to but I thought "hey...". What an utter crock of shit.

When you first find an anomaly the very first thing you check is your instrumentation. These fine scientists have instrumentation of the highest quality, i.e. a webcam and a smartphone camera. Has anyone, perhaps, nipped along to give the Volcam lens a wipe? I think not.

Wasters.

It was an interesting video till the object came in front of the ash clouds and shine as crazy. I don't know what it is but it is not a celestial object for sure....

Sorry; I just don't understand all the misunderstandings about this object being depicted from a stationary camera? This isn't debris on the lens cover as best I can tell?

If that lens made in China then it is indeed a fake.

Actually, "Dr." Astro, your NASA-scripted response of "lens flare" is not very convincing.

I have seen real lens flares and it would be stretching it to say that this is one. The luminosity of this anomaly is uncharacteristic of a lens flare.

Now, you may be right "Dr." Astro, but you have not proven anything. You have simply stated your opinion based on your interpretation of the evidence and until you can prove that your opinion of "lens flare" is a fact, then your interpretation carries no more weight than Mr. Masters'.

Oh, as to whether or not you are NASA shill, I would say that if you respond to this post on cue, then yes I would say that yes there is a high probability that you are a shill. You could also add as evidence the fact that you banned me from one your thread Thread: Potential Epic Comet Collision with Mars in 2014 *UPDATE: VIDEO ON FIRST POST* (Page 6) because you couldn't take the heat.

LMFAO! Oh really? Tell me, is this lens flare on the far left of the field of view too much "luminosity?"
[link to stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov]
lol


My "interpretation" fits the facts. His does not. Yours does not. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Luminosity lol.

I banned you because you were trying to derail my thread which had fuck all to do with your fucking lens flare and when I asked you to stop you laughed and kept on going. Now you're butthurt. Oh well. Your fault.

Last Edited by Astromut on 02/27/2013 07:38 AM

There are so many things wrong with that video it is hard to begin. The biggest problem is that there are so many surfaces that there are multiple sources of reflections. You have the front surface of the protective glass, the back surface of the glass, the front surface of the lens, the back surface of the lens, and the CCD itself. Those are all possible direct reflections.

And to correct you, most of what is seen is not lens flare, it is internal reflections. Lens flare occurs when the source is outside of the field of view and tend to be diffuse. Internal reflections tend to form faint images of the object and normally the objects are in the field of view.

However, some of the reflections are occurring when the object is outside the field of view. These are most likely reflections off of the protective glass and not the lens.

His "analysis" of reflections moving like "hoochie coochie" dancers is way off base. His example was a handheld piece of glass in front of an iphone. In that case, yes the reflection will move around because of the varying angles between the glass and camera. But in the case where the glass and lens are mounted (fixed) you still get a reflection, it just does not dance around. It will not move exactly like the Sun, it depends on the angular relation between the Sun, glass, and lens.

Another thing ignored is scattering. The "image" of Yogi looks like light scattered into the field of view from the shroud or other surface.

There are reasons why satellites have large zones of avoidance around bright objects, like the Sun, Moon, and Jupiter, it because lots of light can be scattered into the telescope optics.

He is right that the marbling in front of Yogi is just out of focus dust.

This is really a poorly done video by someone who really doesn't understand optics.

Look right now....

[link to www.ovsicori.una.ac.cr]

Sun is slightly above and to the left, lens flare in front of the clouds in line, with the "blue bonnet" that Masters gets all worked up over currently in front of the mountain, forming a line with the other flare pointing right at the sun, as always.

Your interpretation fits your data.

Masters's interpretation fits his data.

You may be right "Dr." Astro, but at this point all you have is an opinion (even if it is a well-formed opinion). But let's not conflate an opinion with fact.

"Luminosity" Definition:

Noun

1. Luminous quality: "acrylic colors retain freshness and luminosity".

2. The intrinsic brightness of a celestial object (as distinct from its apparent brightness diminished by distance).




"Dr. Astro" Definition:

1. NASA Shill

2. Killjoy

[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]

Boy, that was a quick response!

[link to www.ovsicori.una.ac.cr]

The camera must be inside a weather housing, you can see a reflection in the safety glass, the blue/purple dots are lense.....an anomaly from the UV rays of the sun. (couldnt bring myself to say it...)

No way!!!The purple dots...ok...But the blue one moves with the sun's position...Cannot be a reflection or a flare.